Hacker News Reader

If everyone updates, then there isn't a longstanding chain split (e.g. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Value_overflow_incident).

But yeah if there's longstanding disagreement, there are two ways for it to go:

* Peaceable fork with replay protection, like Bitcoin Cash

* Fork that seriously fights for the same brand/userbase --- we haven't seen one of these in Bitcoin. Segwit2x would've worked that way, but was canceled

View on HN

Actually that’s an example of a soft fork. When you change the rules to make them more restrictive (add limits, decrease block size, block addresses, etc) those running the old version will find the new blocks valid so will try to build on them and find their blocks to be rejected, but can keep running no problem and are incentivized to upgrade.

When you change the rules to be less restrictive (add operations, increase block size, etc) then any old version will reject the new blocks, so will keep running their own chain until they are upgraded, potentially forever if there’s demand.

I don't think BCC has replay protection.

I bought something with BTC after the fork, and all my BCC was emptied within minutes.

It does. You must have screwed up somewhere else. Segwit 2x had no replay protection, and hence was contentious.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com